Haere ra He Wake Eke Noa

Written By: - Date published: 1:42 pm, June 13th, 2024 - 21 comments
Categories: climate change, energy, Environment, ETS, national, nz first, peak oil, political parties, same old national, science, Shane Jones - Tags:

It was always going to happen but it still rankles that an attempt to get farming to at least confront the damage it causes to the climate is being put on hold.

He Waka Eke Noa was the last Government’s attempt to get the farming sector to do what all other sectors will have to do and that is pay for its emissions. The genesis of the Emissions Trading Scheme is that polluting should cost, and the scheme creates a financial incentive for polluters to reduce their emissions.

And He Waka Eke Noa was hardly revolutionary.

As I said previously the report recommended the introduction of farm-level split-gas levy on agricultural emissions with incentives to reduce emissions and sequester carbon.

The anticipated savings were very small.  It was anticipated that the framework and pricing system would lead to an estimated reduction in methane emissions of between 4 and 5.5%, depending on the availability of technology options.

Existing Government proposals were expected to result in the sector’s methane emissions reduction reaching the Government target of 10%.

The proposal was that timid that Dairy NZ and Federated Farmers were cautiously supportive.  Groundswell thought that the proposal is a disaster and will put farmers out of business but of course they would think that. Their essential rationale was that Farmers should be allowed to do what they want because some farms overseas are even worse.  If this is the test it is well and truly a race to the bottom and humanity has no chance.

Others were scathing. Professor Ralph Sims from Massey University said:

Given that changing climate is already resulting in an increasing frequency and magnitude of extreme weather impacts, with droughts, floods, storms, etc. already being experienced in many regions, the farming sector has more to lose than most from the ever-increasing atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gas emissions.

“It seems surprising therefore that these recommendations for pricing emissions and incentivising their reduction are not far more ambitious.”

Greenpeace was even more scathing and labelled the report an absolute lemon.  

The then Labour Government suggested some tweaks, then in August 2023 announced the final plan.

At the time Chris Hipkins said:

“Nestle, the single biggest customer of our biggest company, Fonterra, has committed to a 50 per cent reduction of scopes 1, 2 and 3 emissions by 2030. Many more companies have similar targets. This is a tectonic shift in our export markets, meaning our farmers will have to reduce their emissions in order to sell to them.

“The reality is, government required or not, our agriculture sector will have to adapt over the coming years and reduce emissions. It’s a fact of business in the 21st Century, but with the support of Government we can make that transition in a pragmatic way with the sector.

National of course was having nothing of this and proposed that pricing of emissions is delayed until 2030 and that New Zealand’s farmers should not have to move until their overseas competitors were more efficient in relatiuon to their production of greenhouse gas emissions.

And this week the inevitable happened. The Government announced that He Waka Eke Noa would be disbanded, the Climate Change Response Act 2002 would be amended so that agriculture did not enter the ETS and it would consult with farming sector organisations on what the future would look like. Not Iwi, not environmental groups but DairyNZ, Beef + Lamb New Zealand, Deer Industry New Zealand, Federated Farmers, Dairy Companies Association of New Zealand, and the Meat Industry Association.

You can imagine what the result will be. And at a time when urgent action is required a further delay is ludicrous.

To add to the sense that the Government is happy to trash our climate response the Government has also recently announced the restarting of offshore oil and gas exploration. It feels like they have announced this change on a number of occasions and checking through Shane Jones in particular has relished in making this announcement.

In December 2023 he blasted the hysteria surrounding climate change.

In March of this year he wanted to see if Government could insure oil companies against a future Government banning oil and gas drilling in the future.

On May 5 of this year he railed against “woke-riddled left” during an energy debate in Parliament.  He also said the opposition had a “faint green vision” to “keep the lights on with unicorn kisses”.

And on May 25 he announced that the Government was removing the “naïve and woke ban on offshore oil and gas exploration”.

I really hope this is a one term Government. They are causing immense damage and the sooner this is stopped the better.

21 comments on “Haere ra He Wake Eke Noa ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Tiger Mountain 1
    13 June 2024 at 2:26 pm

    They are a pack of vandals more accurately, thickos in blue trousers like–“lets go out clubbing…” Sam, and pant suited Dracula’s daughters Willis, Van Velden and Stanford.

    Don’t just hope it is a one termer Micky–make it so. If you are still in an LEC, put resolutions to despatch Rogernomics officially once and for all, so that an organic political unity can happen with Greens and TPM.
    • PSA needs to drop political neutrality and take direct action
    • NZCTU needs a class left leadership and approach, involving non members and communities also
    • Form a Māori Parliament (not a neo beehive but a rolling national forum as has been happening since the election).

  2. lprent 2
    13 June 2024 at 2:44 pm

    Snap. I just wrote https://thestandard.org.nz/national-announced-more-subsidies-in-farming-for-capital-gains/

    The thing that gets me about farming is just how bloody uneconomic it actually is. An industry where the producers only pay about 3.5 billion in taxes, on a massive amount of invested capital. Pastoral land is about $34k per hectare for somewhere now a little under 15 million hectares is a colossal number.

    • bwaghorn 2.1
      13 June 2024 at 7:17 pm

      An industry where the producers only pay about 3.5 billion in taxes,

      The main reason for that is they can offset interest, and other expenses from their tax ,so are incourged aided ,guided conned by the banks to stay in debt, and or to spend profits back into the farm

      • lprent 2.1.1
        13 June 2024 at 8:43 pm

        Yep, and capital gains from selling a farm aren't taxed. This is an old old issue

        Research by Eves and Painter (2008) compared farm land returns from Australia, Canada, United States and New Zealand. They noted that since 1990 the price of New Zealand farmland averaged 40 times earnings and expressed doubts about the sustainability of such a high price earnings ratio when compared to ratios of between 15 and 26 for the three other countries. Locke (2009) pointed out that based on the current milk payout a $6m dairy farm with a $2m mortgage at 9 percent interest 3 would make a seasonal loss of $130,000. The Reserve Bank (2009) questioned the sustainability of agricultural debt levels, particularly for dairy farms which appeared to be at the most risk. The Reserve Bank noted total rural debt increased 30 percent in 2007 and 2008 with dairy farm debt increasing 61.5 percent.

        These operational numbers have gotten worse rather than better. It is only the low interest rates between then and recently that has sustained the capital gain pyramid scheme.

      • Hunter Thompson II 2.1.2
        14 June 2024 at 9:35 am

        They work the tax system as well as the land. All quite legal apparently, but I doubt if it is good for NZ in the long run.

        For what can go wrong, check out this court case: https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/127872775/farmers-never-gave-up-in-eightyear-battle-with-real-estate-company

        Damages awarded in the High Court were reduced to $300,000 in the Ct of Appeal.

  4. thinker 4
    13 June 2024 at 6:26 pm

    And my proposal, to tax the gas released at post-cabinet press briefings, won't work either, because our government, "…by some of the people for a minority of the people" (sorry, Karl) has cut those back, too.

    I guess if you want to know what's going on, you can sign up as a member of one of the coalition parties.

  5. Mike the Lefty 5
    13 June 2024 at 7:04 pm

    I wouldn't put it past National to take credit for the lower price of fruit and vegetables this season. They had nothing to do with, it was that it was a particularly good growing season in contrast to the previous one that was terrible (they blamed Labour for the bad weather of course).

    National are so great that they can control the climate you know, that's why they don't take climate change seriously, they think they are greater than it.

    • lprent 5.1
      13 June 2024 at 8:51 pm

      That was El Nino which looks like it was just a single year one this time.

      La Nina looks like it will back down here for next year. It will take a bit of time to get to the point of drowning my car again with flooding, or washing out a whole province (ie remember 2023). But it will probably head there again in the next few years.

      WMO: El Niño is forecast to swing to La Niña later this year

      NIWA: Seasonal Climate Outlook June – August 2024

      • El Niño, which was active since September 2023, has ended and given way to ENSO neutral conditions, which are expected to last through winter. A La Niña Watch has been issued with a 60-70% chance of La Niña developing during spring.
  6. adam 6
    13 June 2024 at 9:22 pm

    And they have the gall to call anarchists a problem.

  7. weka 7
    13 June 2024 at 10:30 pm

    For context, here's James Shaw's view on HEWN, once he was finally free to speak,

    Outgoing Green Party co-leader James Shaw says the system Labour produced to make farmers pay for their climate pollution was so dysfunctional it would have been counter-productive if it had passed. In the end, he decided it was better to abandon the policy entirely than compromise and support it.

    In an interview with Newsroom on Wednesday, the former Climate Change Minister shared details of his “blazing rows” over He Waka Eke Noa which ultimately ended in failure – for himself and the two decade quest to price greenhouse gas emissions from livestock.

    https://newsroom.co.nz/2024/02/01/behind-the-scenes-of-shaws-blazing-rows-over-climate/

  8. PsyclingLeft.Always 8
    14 June 2024 at 8:11 am

    Someone else's problem ?!

    Who's paying for the environmental costs of farming?

    Agriculture’s higher share of GDP than employment reflects the sector’s high reliance on our natural environment to produce its output. However, this economic value comes at both a significant financial and environmental cost, often hidden, much of which falls on future generations.

    ECan concluded this economic impact for farmers was too high and did nothing. By not charging the polluters for this harm, ECan effectively handed a subsidy to dairy farmers in this catchment to the tune of $250 million every year.

    https://www.wgtn.ac.nz/news/2022/03/whos-paying-for-the-environmental-costs-of-farming

    And…Canterbury Nitrates, NZ wide River and Stream water extraction and pollution, etc etc…..

  9. Obtrectator 9
    14 June 2024 at 11:23 pm

    ECan concluded this economic impact for farmers was too high and did nothing.

    'Hem! surely not already forgotten what happened the last time ECan tried to stand up to farmers' demands (March 2010)?

    • Maurice 9.1
      15 June 2024 at 4:32 am

      It behooves us to remember that farmers surround cities and towns; control food supplies; control the sources of water (which they can pollute at will); have a strangle-hold on transport links ( all inter city roads track through farm areas) and with their huge debt burdens can collapse the Banking system by simply defaulting.

      Game. Set. Match ????

      • Mike the Lefty 9.1.1
        15 June 2024 at 7:18 am

        It's actually big business and corporates that do all that, the farmers just enthusiastically buy into the lie that is THEY have the power.

      • lprent 9.1.2
        15 June 2024 at 8:03 am

        You have to be fucking kidding, kind of insane, stupid and obviously have no appreciation of the lessons of history.

        What exactly happens if anyone is stupid enough to set up a rebellion that tries to cut transport links. Why do you think that the military would sit by in the event of any organised attempt to disrupt those. The urban population in NZ is about 87% of the population. That is only if you count in people outside of the top 10 towns and cities as being non-urbanised. The proportions of sources of police and military are similar. Mostly drawn from urban populations.

        Also work it the other way. The ports are in cities. The town and cities are on roads. The sources of capital are in the cities – mainly Auckland. Plus all of the engineering and manufacturing supplies and plants outside of light engineering firms. The skills that operate and run the software and servers that farmers are increasingly using.

        Also the same for all weapons logistics. The civilian ammo supplies are urban. The military ammo dumps are in well-defended bases.

        For such a rebellion to work, that small rural population would have to attempt to take over and hold large urban areas, military bases. It simply isn’t possible to do that for the whole of the country. Not to mention dealing with the naval blockade on the few ports that were taken.

        But even if it wasn’t a armed rebellion and just remains a economic one. Then the same applies.

        The rural population is spread out and not concentrated. It is also essentially not a profitable set of industries for the country. Central tax directly from farming are at best less than 6% of the total tax. Having high export revenues is a meaningless calculation when farming or forestry are essentially non-profitable to anyone apart from overseas banks and other farmers for capital gain. The proportion of costs subsidies to farming just through the maintenance of rural roads is probably higher.

        The rest of NZ could get by with main highways, ports, airports and tourist destination roads and be better off. Tourism is much more profitable for the country than farming. But even when that wasn’t present during year long lock downs, it didn’t make that much difference.

        Basically the urban population could easily shed the dead weight of farmers who want urbanises to pay for their pollution costs, and would probably come out ahead. They’d just have to retain enough rural land to maintain the food production for NZ. That is less than 4% of the current farmlands and mostly the market gardens. We’d also stop having to compete with overseas prices for food, which means that price for animal products like meat, milk and cheese would drop.

        As I said – you are rather stupid and clearly haven’t looked at the history of the last 500 years. There is a reason that rural based rebellions really don’t usually succeed. Rural populations can just get organised enough to be a nuisance.

        What farmers can’t do is to convince urban populations that they are important enough to the whole economy to distort the economy solely to subsidise and protect them.

        They can’t even convince most of their own kids – who keep pouring out of rural into the cities.

        • Maurice 9.1.2.1
          15 June 2024 at 1:27 pm

          Where on earth did you come up with "rebellion" ?

          It is all much more subtle than that.

          From ACT this morning: "ACT understands that when rural communities are free to flourish, we're all better off.

          The war on farmers is over. We're winding back the red tape and restoring common sense, property rights, and efficiency to New Zealand's rural backbone."

          It is the hopeless left who are being sent to the dustbin of history – and must be kept there. The peaceful "revolution" is under way.

          • lprent 9.1.2.1.1
            15 June 2024 at 2:45 pm

            Where on earth did you come up with "rebellion" ?

            Umm. Perhaps because you described a armed and militant rebellion

            It behooves us to remember that farmers surround cities and towns; control food supplies; control the sources of water (which they can pollute at will); have a strangle-hold on transport links ( all inter city roads track through farm areas) and with their huge debt burdens can collapse the Banking system by simply defaulting.

            You didn't think how you'd have to close transport links against enraged cars and trucks? Or that it is unlawful to block public ways. That it is a basis for declaring a state of emergency because it prevents the transport of goods.

            Or that polluting waterways or diverting them is also unlawful.

            Doing any of those things on a widespread basis would trigger the declaration of a state of emergency, would trigger civil defence, police and armed forces to deal with the problem with the force and arrest was required to rectify the situation. They would do it because doing any of the things that you describe would cause urban populations to come into conflict with the gormless idiots who were trying to starve them or poison their water.

            From ACT this morning: "ACT understands that when rural communities are free to flourish, we're all better off.

            The war on farmers is over. We're winding back the red tape and restoring common sense, property rights, and efficiency to New Zealand's rural backbone

            And as usual there are absolutely no references to how any of this helps the NZ economy. It is all just pious hand waving, references to magical appearances of new technology (you know what hasn't ever appeared in the last 30 years), and a dependence on forestry taking over farmlands.

            Plus of course if Act are wrong – as they invariably are about their magical powers to change the economy, then the actual taxpayers (ie not farmers) will have to pick up the tab for things like fixing farmer polluted waterways, climate change, disasters from weather on farms and land, fixing washed out rural roads etc.

            In other words, Act want farmers to become less self-reliant and more dependent on the largess of the state and the forbearance of the urban of town and city taxpayers, ratepayers and businesses

            ACT are is like all fanatical religious cults. It doesn't depend on knowledge, it runs purely on myth, faith, and a vile envy of the people who aren't admiring of their stupidity and who actually work intelligently for a better world for all.

            Idiots like that never describe their sources for their unsubstantiated assertions. Which is what I notice about brainless idiots like you and the things that you quote.

            For instance if you actually read Acts press release that you referenced (and clearly didn’t look at in any depth) and the links in it, try and find anything in there that details how these actions help the country or the economy as a whole over the long term. I couldn't see any. All I saw was a description of how the dealing with the burden of R&D, pollution from farming in the atmosphere, waterways, and weather was all going to be paid for by the urban taxpayers – not by the people who were supposedly running a profitable industry.

            Basically farmers are falling into the trap again that they hit in the 1970s and 80s. They are again bludging off the taxes, rates and levies that non-farmers pay to pay for the services and infrastructure that allow farming to exist. They are steadily getting less profitable as land prices rise and prices for their products do not. That is because their export based industry is again falling into a unprofitable ruin selling largely unprocessed commodities internationally.

            And we all know what happened then… It is why the shape of farming that was present then is now in the dustbin of history along with 40 million other sheep

          • joe90 9.1.2.1.2
            15 June 2024 at 3:20 pm

            when rural communities are free to flourish

            The rising concentration of wealth/foreign/off-farm ownership, mechanisation, increasing use of off-farm/contract labour and the country schools circle of doom has reduced rural populations to half what they were in 1960.

            Rural communities ain't never going to flourish, sport.

            /

            • lprent 9.1.2.1.2.1
              15 June 2024 at 3:32 pm

              Most noticeable (in my opinion) in the lower South Island – probably because of a lack of hills.

              There are whole townships that are just missing or a shadow of what they were compared to what it was like when I was working between Oamaru, Invercargill, and Queenstown in the mid-1980s. And then, I thought that it'd dropped a lot since I'd previously been around there as a kid in 1975.

              Rural population in NZ (click for data)

              Urban population in NZ (click for data)

  10. Maurice 10
    15 June 2024 at 4:24 pm

    Thanks for the verbose revelations of your thought process and position.

    The way you leap to the "rebellion" conclusion is instructive.

    Farmers do seem to be not well thought of!

    More to be revealed yet?